To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

2012 Oklahoma Epidemiological Profile
Epidemiology, the science of public health, provides vital information about disorders that threaten the
health and well‐being of populations. Epidemiological data identify problems, help determine what
areas and who are affected by the problems—knowledge that is essential for effective intervention—
and measure the success of interventions aimed at preventing or reducing these problems. Engagement
in a thoughtful planning process, including careful assessments of needs, resources, capacity, readiness,
and contextual conditions—prior to selecting strategies—is essential to successful prevention efforts.
This data focus—collection, analysis, and use—is entrenched in each step of the SPF and continually
informs the process. The formal assessment of contextual conditions, needs, resources, readiness, and
capacity is used to identify priority issues in Step 1. In Step 2, data are shared to generate awareness,
spur mobilization, and leverage resources. In Step 3, assessment data are used to drive the development
of a strategic plan and guide the selection of evidence‐based strategies. Data are used in Step 4 to
inform (and, if necessary, revise) the implementation plan. And finally, data are collected to monitor
progress toward outcomes, and findings are used to make adjustments and develop sustainable
prevention efforts.
The Oklahoma State Epidemiological Outcomes Workgroup (SEOW) is a multidisciplinary workgroup
whose members are connected to key decision‐making and resource allocation bodies in the state. This
workgroup, funded through a Federal grant from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA)/Center for Substance Abuse and Prevention (CSAP), was established by the
Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services in 2006 and is patterned after
the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) community epidemiological workgroup. Oklahoma’s SEOW
is charged with improving prevention assessment, planning, implementation, and monitoring efforts
through data collection and analysis that accurately assesses the causes and consequences of the use of
alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and drives decisions concerning the effective and efficient use of
prevention resources throughout the state.
To study the nature and extent of the problem of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use in Oklahoma, the
state’s SEOW utilized the CSAP model of consumption and consequence constructs and indicators. Table
1 provides a complete listing of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit and prescription drug consumption and
consequence constructs. For each construct, one or more identifiable indicators (measures) were used
to quantify consumption and substance‐related consequences. Unlike the underlying constructs, these
indicators are precisely defined and determined by specific data sources. Thus, while “alcohol‐related
mortality” is a relevant construct for monitoring trends of an important consequence of use, it does not
provide a precise definition of how this construct can be measured. However, a number of indicators do
provide specific measures of this construct (e.g., annual incidence rate of deaths attributable to alcohol‐related
chronic liver disease, suicide, or crash fatalities).
The Center for Substance Abuse and Prevention (CSAP) recommendations were not available for
prescription drugs, so Oklahoma used the same data sources CSAP recommended for the other
constructs and indicators.

2012 Oklahoma Epidemiological Profile
Epidemiology, the science of public health, provides vital information about disorders that threaten the
health and well‐being of populations. Epidemiological data identify problems, help determine what
areas and who are affected by the problems—knowledge that is essential for effective intervention—
and measure the success of interventions aimed at preventing or reducing these problems. Engagement
in a thoughtful planning process, including careful assessments of needs, resources, capacity, readiness,
and contextual conditions—prior to selecting strategies—is essential to successful prevention efforts.
This data focus—collection, analysis, and use—is entrenched in each step of the SPF and continually
informs the process. The formal assessment of contextual conditions, needs, resources, readiness, and
capacity is used to identify priority issues in Step 1. In Step 2, data are shared to generate awareness,
spur mobilization, and leverage resources. In Step 3, assessment data are used to drive the development
of a strategic plan and guide the selection of evidence‐based strategies. Data are used in Step 4 to
inform (and, if necessary, revise) the implementation plan. And finally, data are collected to monitor
progress toward outcomes, and findings are used to make adjustments and develop sustainable
prevention efforts.
The Oklahoma State Epidemiological Outcomes Workgroup (SEOW) is a multidisciplinary workgroup
whose members are connected to key decision‐making and resource allocation bodies in the state. This
workgroup, funded through a Federal grant from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA)/Center for Substance Abuse and Prevention (CSAP), was established by the
Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services in 2006 and is patterned after
the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) community epidemiological workgroup. Oklahoma’s SEOW
is charged with improving prevention assessment, planning, implementation, and monitoring efforts
through data collection and analysis that accurately assesses the causes and consequences of the use of
alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and drives decisions concerning the effective and efficient use of
prevention resources throughout the state.
To study the nature and extent of the problem of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use in Oklahoma, the
state’s SEOW utilized the CSAP model of consumption and consequence constructs and indicators. Table
1 provides a complete listing of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit and prescription drug consumption and
consequence constructs. For each construct, one or more identifiable indicators (measures) were used
to quantify consumption and substance‐related consequences. Unlike the underlying constructs, these
indicators are precisely defined and determined by specific data sources. Thus, while “alcohol‐related
mortality” is a relevant construct for monitoring trends of an important consequence of use, it does not
provide a precise definition of how this construct can be measured. However, a number of indicators do
provide specific measures of this construct (e.g., annual incidence rate of deaths attributable to alcohol‐related
chronic liver disease, suicide, or crash fatalities).
The Center for Substance Abuse and Prevention (CSAP) recommendations were not available for
prescription drugs, so Oklahoma used the same data sources CSAP recommended for the other
constructs and indicators.